Quote from: Herne's Son;1031144

Quote from: jcfiala;10311311) Stats are now on a 0-100 range, instead of a 3-18 as before.  (Basically, multiply stats by 5).

This simple change showed a fundamental lack of understanding how BRP works by the new designers. I never managed to even get around to reading how the monsters with larger ability scores were handled. How did they convert a monster with (EG) a 6th edtion STR of 60+ in the new edition?

Seriously?  You multiply by 5.  60x5 = 300, if you needed me to explain that to you.

And besides, once you hit a strength that high it doesn't really matter.  How strong is it?  When it hits something, it breaks.  If it hits a character, they're dead.

Quote from: Omega;1031132That is the utterly retarded mindset you morons have thats cause these idiotic edition treadmills where each new version is somehow incompatible with the past ones.

You do realize people have different tastes when it comes to rpgs right. I know it's a simple concept and one utterly alien to a grognard. The hobby moves forward with or without you. But hey great attempt at being a shitty utterly useless edgelord with your retarded comment.

Quote from: Omega;1031132YOU DO NOT NEED A NEW SYSTEM. EVERY EDITION THAT IS NOT EFFECTIVELY A REPRINT LOSES YOU CUSTOMERS.

Their is no real good reason to buy a reprint. Not unless one loses their copy, has it stolen, or a rich gamer. I kept my 4E copy until it feel apart and bought 6E. I had and have absolutely no reason to buy first, second, third, and fifth edition. Feel free to type in caps again to shore up your lack of self esteem.

While Pulp Cthulhu is not my thing I considered it a interesting experiment thst showcases how flexible BRP can be.

With the proliferation of Cthulhu games, Chaosium probably thought Call of Cthulhu was 'under attack' from both the tactical side with Savage Worlds and other more Pulp versions that beefed up the combat and the Storygaming side with Fate, etc versions.

As a result, to 'stay relevant' they basically threw in a scattershot of houserules, narrative stuff, and pulpy rules.

They forgot that the greatest thing about noteworthy Cthulhu lines are the adventures and supplements. No matter what system they use, people still buy Call of Cthulhu, Delta Green, Trail of Cthulhu, Cakebread and Walton, all the various WWII Cthulhu games, because they put out decent to outstanding adventures and supplements.

We needed CoC 7th like we needed the personal attention of Nyarlathotep.

Quote from: Simlasa;1031150The re-roll on skills has long been a popular house rule.

It was a houserule at our tables. We played RAW at first but after one too many bad skill roles and not finding a necessary clue needed to continue a session we adopted re-rolls on skills. The Keeper can only have the necessary clues miraculously appear so many times. Not to mention Henry Armitage did not spend endless hours looking for the necessary magical formula needed to banish Wilbur Whateley son.

Yeah, I think it's the competition and the complaints and analysis behind it probably led to the changes.  A consistent complaint was people missing vital clues due to failed skill rolls.  If the clue's that vital, why are you making them roll for it in the first place.  You usually have to shove these things in their faces to make the players notice.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1031174With the proliferation of Cthulhu games, Chaosium probably thought Call of Cthulhu was 'under attack' from both the tactical side with Savage Worlds and other more Pulp versions that beefed up the combat and the Storygaming side with Fate, etc versions.

Well, when discussing this, one should keep in mind that the Chaosium that thought that died on this hill.  The kickstarter for CoC7th edition killed the company, and it only survives by having the people in charge tossed out and replaced with a bunch of folks from another company.  I don't know if the new folks (who were involved with Runequest more than CoC) believe in the changes made, but they were kind of stuck with them when they took up the reins - the pdfs had already gone out to backers, and the books couldn't be changed at that point, I expect, without making the company go backrupt again.

They're stuck with 7th edition, I suspect, until and unless 8th comes along.  Or 7th edition revised.

Combat is much more interesting in 7E.

CoC never had the same cool combat RuneQuest had, but still adopted its basic mechanisms. 7E did something cool with it. I like it.

Is there a poll somewhere showing which version of CoC is most favored?

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;1031199CoC never had the same cool combat RuneQuest had, but still adopted its basic mechanisms. 7E did something cool with it.

I'm not sure exactly why you think it's been 'improved', but 'cool combat' was never something I wanted out of CoC... though I can see beefing up the fighting in Pulp Cthulhu.

Quote from: Simlasa;1031203I'm not sure exactly why you think it's been 'improved', but 'cool combat' was never something I wanted out of CoC... though I can see beefing up the fighting in Pulp Cthulhu.

Let's not be pedantic, my friend. Exchange cool for engaging if you wish. 7E has well integrated melee rules that account for the granularity of the d100 much better than previous editions.

My players have been involved in firefights against cultists across graveyards, complete with cover (mausoleums and gravestones) and heightened positions (sniper on church tower). To act as if combat is not an integral part of the game seems to contradict the evidence of CoC's 35 year history.

7E cleaned melee and ranged combat up ever so slightly where it makes more sense now and is simply more interesting. And it works well with the established system without going full RuneQuest.

Call of Cthulhu has never been purely Lovecraftian and even then: have you read The Dunwich Horror?

Quote from: CRKrueger;1031174With the proliferation of Cthulhu games, Chaosium probably thought Call of Cthulhu was 'under attack' from both the tactical side with Savage Worlds and other more Pulp versions that beefed up the combat and the Storygaming side with Fate, etc versions.

As a result, to 'stay relevant' they basically threw in a scattershot of houserules, narrative stuff, and pulpy rules.

They forgot that the greatest thing about noteworthy Cthulhu lines are the adventures and supplements. No matter what system they use, people still buy Call of Cthulhu, Delta Green, Trail of Cthulhu, Cakebread and Walton, all the various WWII Cthulhu games, because they put out decent to outstanding adventures and supplements.

We needed CoC 7th like we needed the personal attention of Nyarlathotep.

The thing is though, have they really been putting out great adventures/supplements? They just reprint a lot of stuff. I think the last really must have adventure from them was Tatters of the King and that's like 10+ years old.

And in terms of city stuff, I think Cubicle 7's stuff has been a lot better. They finally made a London sourcebook for CoC that didn't suck anyway.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;1031206Let's not be pedantic, my friend. Exchange cool for engaging if you wish. 7E has well integrated melee rules that account for the granularity of the d100 much better than previous editions.

My players have been involved in firefights against cultists across graveyards, complete with cover (mausoleums and gravestones) and heightened positions (sniper on church tower). To act as if combat is not an integral part of the game seems to contradict the evidence of CoC's 35 year history.

7E cleaned melee and ranged combat up ever so slightly where it makes more sense now and is simply more interesting. And it works well with the established system without going full RuneQuest.

Call of Cthulhu has never been purely Lovecraftian and even then: have you read The Dunwich Horror?

Agreed and seconded. Against say Cthulhu, or against greater minions trying to attack them was asking for the Investigator to be killed off imo. Against cultists and some of the lesser minions I can see some investigators putting up fight imo. Only so many times a group can run away from encounters even in COC. Nor is making combat interesting, improved and engaging a bad thing imo.

Quote from: David Johansen;1031183Yeah, I think it's the competition and the complaints and analysis behind it probably led to the changes.  A consistent complaint was people missing vital clues due to failed skill rolls.  If the clue's that vital, why are you making them roll for it in the first place.  You usually have to shove these things in their faces to make the players notice.

Then again in Lovecraft stories it's rare that a clue is just sitting their out in the open easy to find by anyone. It's implied that players need to go looking in dusty secretly hidden tomes and tombs for clues. If clues are not supposed to be easy to find make them easy to find also is not a good thing. So to my group re-rolling skill rolls to find clues was a much needed official change imo.

Judging from what everyone is saying, the changes don't make the game more difficult to play but only a few of them are actually improving things which did not work well before.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1031231Judging from what everyone is saying, the changes don't make the game more difficult to play but only a few of them are actually improving things which did not work well before.

Well, the new chase rules add a bit of bulk, as do the changes to combat. It's not that I'm against combat in the game, I just never felt it needed extra crunch.